Re: [idn] Zone rules (was: wg milestones update)

["James Seng/Personal" <James@Seng.cc>]

I think irregardless of the whether TC-SC is possible or whether there
is any merit to do it, I think that part of the discussion should be
done else where, not the requirements doc. Putting design specific
issues into requirements doc (especially one which is language specific)
is not going to be constructive.

I suggest we move the discussion of TC-SC to some other doc (primarly I
am looking at Nameprep here. Dont shoot me :) so we can move on with the
requirements doc.

-James Seng

----- Original Message -----
From: "Sun Guonian" <sun@pier.cnnic.net.cn>
To: "Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine" <brunner@nic-naa.net>
Cc: <idn@ops.ietf.org>
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2001 6:19 PM
Subject: Re: [idn] Zone rules (was: wg milestones update)


> sorry, about -05 [30] maybe I don't express my point clear.
>
> if the zone managers could define the equivalence rules respectively,
users could
> be confusing between different zones.
>
> for chinese user, the TC-SC equivalence rule is just alike the
case-folding rule.
> I'd like to show an example followed using the case-folding rule.
>
> under zone .COM, if manager defines upper case characters equal to
lower case
> characters. users could access IBM' domain with ibm.com, IBm.com, ...
in any
> case.
>
> in another hand, under zone .NET, if manager defines upper case
characters DON'T
> equal to lower case characters. then ibm.net , IBm.net, iBM.net, ...
will be
> eight different domains, (without considering the TLD .net, such as
.NET, .Net),
> and, if the .NET-registry do the equivalence in their policy, they
must put 8
> records in their zone. if they don't, users will get the different
experience
> between .COM and .NET .
>
> So I think the TC-SC equivalence rule SHOULD be consistent anywhere .
>
> regards,
> sun guonian
>
> Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine wrote:
>
> > Jony,
> >
> > My first comment is that requirement 35 has been in the requirements
document
> > for several drafts. A one line expressions of preference is under
motivating.
> >
> > My second comment is that any mechanism which allows non-degenerate
scope,
> > and for which a policy of specific consistency between two or more
instances
> > of scope, requires a  mechanism to obtain consistency. The notion
that
> >         "[e]ither we are consistent or we are inconsistent, but we
cannot
> >         have it once one way and once the other."
> > presumes that consistency is a global, binary property. Is this
consistency
> > loose and converging or strict and atemporal?
> >
> > My third comment is in response to your example. Could you provide
one with
> > specific code-points and two distinct equivalence rules and restate
the core
> > issue?
> >
> > Incidently, since you happened to mention digits, Wabanakis in New
England,
> > Quebec, and the Canadian Maritimes define "8" as an equivalent to
"ou", as
> > the "w" character was not present in French when that writing system
was
> > adopted. There are UNICODE code points for the characters, but North
American
> > keyboards have the digit "8", which is used.
> >
> > So, without stepping outside of the LDH code points, the manager of
a zone
> > could create a rule that treats a 0x38 as 0x4f followed by 0x55,
assuming
> > the "8" appeared within an alpha string as the first, or as 0x6f
followed
> > by 0x75, for an in-fix character, and 0x38 if as a terminal, and, as
0x57
> > or 0x77, using the same first-or-infix rule. This could "suit the
purpose
> > of the zone".
> >
> > I'd appreciate clarification if this is or isn't an instance of the
practice
> > (depricated in your note) referred in in requirement 35. I could be
lacking
> > a clue.
> >
> > Finally, what do you propose as rewording of requirement 35?
> >
> > Eric
> >
> > References:
> > U+0222  LATIN CAPITAL LETTER OU
> > U+0223  LATIN SMALL LETTER OU
>
> --
> *****************************************************
> * China Internet Network Information Center (CNNIC) *
> *   Sun Guonian                    No.4, S.4 Street *
> *                                  Zhong Guan Cun   *
> * Phone: 86-10-62553604            Haidian District *
> * Email: sun@cnnic.net.cn          Beijing          *
> * http://drop.cnnic.net.cn/~sun/   P.O.Box: 100080  *
> *****************************************************
> * 中国互联网络信息中心    孙国念                    *
> *****************************************************
>
>